Clara Wingnek. Arctic Governance: An Examination of the Effectiveness of Governing Bodies in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut

Transcription

1 MAY 2017 / JANE GLASSCO NORTHERN FELLOWSHIP Clara Wingnek Arctic Governance: An Examination of the Effectiveness of Governing Bodies in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut

2 CONTENTS 2 Biography 3 Executive Summary 4 Background 4 THE NUNAVUT LAND CLAIMS AGREEMENT 5 INSTITUTIONS OF PUBLIC GOVERNMENT 7 INUIT ORGANIZATIONS 8 OTHER BOARDS 9 THE KITIKMEOT REGION 11 Research 12 Conclusion 14 Recommendations 15 Academic Studies in Governance 17 Appendix A : Board Members 18 Appendix B : Board Information 24 Appendix C : Board Representation 2

3 The Gordon Foundation undertakes research, leadership development and public dialogue so that public policies in Canada reflect a commitment to collaborative stewardship of our freshwater resources and to a people-driven, equitable and evolving North. Our mission is to promote innovative public policies for the North and in fresh water management based on our values of independent thought, protecting the environment, and full participation of indigenous people in the decisions that affect their well-being. Over the past quarter century The Gordon Foundation has invested over $37 million in a wide variety of northern community initiatives and freshwater protection initiatives. The Jane Glassco Northern Fellowship is a policy and leadership development program that recognizes leadership potential among young northern Canadians who want to address the emerging policy challenges facing the North. The two year long program is built around four regional gatherings and offers skills training, mentorship and networking opportunities. Through self-directed learning, group work and the collective sharing of knowledge, Fellows will foster a deeper understanding of important contemporary northern issues, and develop the skills and confidence to better articulate and share their ideas and policy research publicly. The Fellowship is intended for young northerners between 25 and 35 years of age, who want to build a strong North that benefits all northerners. Through the Fellowship, we hope to foster a bond among the Fellows that will endure throughout their professional lives and support a pan-northern network.

4 BIOGRAPHY Clara Wingnek Clara Wingnek is from a western Nunavut community called Cambridge Bay. She studied Business Management with Grant MacEwan University and has worked in several fields in the north, including tourism and education. Currently, Clara is a regional finance manager working with the Department of Health, Government of Nunavut. Aside from this, she is a member of the Jane Glassco Northern Fellowship, a board member with the Nunavut Joint Planning and Management Committee for Territorial Parks and recent co-chair of the Ikaluktutiak District Education Authority. As a board member with the Ikaluktutiak District Education Authority she worked closely with K 12 schools in her community to ensure that effective policies were adopted and implemented, endorsed the value of education to the community, monitored school plans and provided direction to principals on how to oversee these schools. Her passion includes setting the stage for change in local governance models and is focusing her research in the Jane Glassco Northern Fellowship in this area. 2 BIOGRAPHY

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Canada s northern communities are predominantly governed by various boards and committees. From Institutions of Public Government (IPGs), whose mandates map the Inuit span of control outlined in the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement (NLCA), to smaller, more defined obligations such as managing the operations of a local daycare, these bodies are hugely important to how these communities function. The purpose of this study is to find out how effective the public boards are in the Kitikmeot region of Nunavut. The Kitikmeot region of Nunavut is comprised of five communities: Kugaaruk, Taloyoak, Gjoa Haven, Kugluktuk, and the administrative hub of the region, Cambridge Bay. The Kitikmeot region is the smallest of Nunavut s three regions with a collective population of approximately 6,500 people, most of whom are under the age of 25. My approach to the research consisted of canvassing the region for feedback on recent experiences with public boards from a membership level. Through my research I tried to understand the challenges that were overcome and the successes, and also the processes that were used to make decisions. By searching the internet and scanning news and media outlets, I was able to construct a listing of boards that functioned with members from the Kitikmeot region and through this list I reached out for participation. The findings were clear. There were consistencies throughout on what they identified as barriers but also pathways to success. Board training was not always available to members and the training varied among members, ineffective chairing of meetings, cancelled meetings, lack of resources and communication barriers were all identified as challenges. Success came when the appointing body engaged members continuously, communications were clear and concise, and resources were available for the members to complete tasks assigned to them. There are numerous Canadian postsecondary institutes that offer academic disciplines relevant to northern governance, like the University of Saskatchewan, which offers a master s program in Northern Governance and Development, but there have been few examinations of how boards currently function in the Kitikmeot region and whether or not these boards are effective in achieving their mandates. This paper aims to address that research gap. This paper does not necessarily apply to local boards in other regions in Nunavut. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

6 BACKGROUND The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement S igned in 1993, the Nunavut Lands Claims Agreement (NLCA) became a binding contract between the Government of Canada and the Inuit in the Nunavut Settlement Area. This contract stipulates the conditions of the exchange between Aboriginal title to the Nunavut land mass and the rights and benefits set out in the NLCA. These benefits include a cash settlement, changes in the ownership of land and its minerals, and ultimately the creation of Nunavut, which occurred in Negotiations for the NLCA started in 1976 and this agreement has become a leading example of a solid aboriginal land claims agreement to many people worldwide. A key goal of the NCLA is to encourage self-reliance, and many elements are intended to ensure more employment and training opportunities for Inuit. Several Inuit organizations were thus birthed from this agreement, whose duties are to protect and preserve the Inuit identity. One of these organizations is Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, which works closely with Regional Inuit Associations (RIAs) and the Institutions of Public Government (IPGs) also created under the land claim. The IPGs allow for the joint management among the Inuit of Nunavut and the territory of Nunavut of all lands, waters and wildlife resources. In total, there are five IPGs in Nunavut. 1 Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated. (accessed January 2017). 4 BACKGROUND

7 Institutions of Public Government NUNAVUT WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT BOARD The role of the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board (NWMB) is to include Inuit in the wildlife decisions made in Nunavut. The comanagement model set out by the NCLA is focused on the partnership of Inuit and the Government of Nunavut (GN) in all aspects of the institution s commission and conduct of research programs. Co-management is required for all approvals, advice, recommendations and information. The GN then implements and enforces the NWMB decisions once they are made. Working groups and committees are developed through the NWMB that focus on specific wildlife management issues.2 This board is based in Iqaluit. NUNAVUT PLANNING COMMISSION The Nunavut Planning Commission (NPC) was established by the NCLA to establish wide-ranging planning policies, goals and objectives for the Nunavut Settlement Area (NSA), as well as develop land use plans that provide guidance and direction for resource use, development and conservation.3 Similar to the NWMB, the co-management model set out by the NCLA is focused on the partnership of Inuit and the Government of Nunavut in all aspects of the institution s conduct. Co-management is required for all approvals, advice, recommendations and information. The GN then implements and enforces NPCs decisions once they are made. This board is based in Iqaluit with regional offices in Cambridge Bay and Arviat. decisions once they are made. Working groups and committees are developed through the NWMB that focus on specific wildlife management issues. This board is based in Iqaluit. 2 Nunavut Wildlife Management Board. (accessed January 2017). 3 Nunavut Planning Commission. (accessed January 2017). BACKGROUND 5

8 NUNAVUT IMPACT REVIEW BOARD The Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) was established by the NLCA and is responsible for screening development project proposals for potential impacts on Nunavut and determining if a public review of these proposals is required. During this process, the NIRB is responsible for defining the regional socio-economic and environmental impacts of these proposals, determining whether the project should proceed and under what terms and conditions, reporting these findings to the Minister of Environment for Nunavut, and then monitoring the projects in accordance with provisions set out in the NLCA. The main purpose of the NIRB is to protect and promote the existing and future wellbeing of the residents and communities of the Nunavut Settlement Area (NSA), and to protect the ecosystemic integrity of the NSA.4 The NIRB must also take into account the wellbeing of residents of Canada outside the NSA. This board is based in Cambridge Bay. NUNAVUT WATER BOARD The Nunavut Water Board (NWB) was established as an IPG under the NLCA. The NWB has responsibilities and powers over the regulation, use and management of inland waters in the NSA. Their main function is approving the licensing uses of water and deposits of waste, in addition to considering the environmental effects of these decisions as regulated by the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act. This board is based in Gjoa Haven.5 NUNAVUT SURFACE RIGHTS TRIBUNAL The Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal (NSRT) is established by the NCLA. The NSRT is responsible for dispute resolution related to the access to surface land in Nunavut and claims for compensation arising from loss or damage to wildlife, carving stone and other specified substances from development in Nunavut.6,7 Just as with the NWB, this body must adhere to the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act. However, NSRT is not an agent of the Government of Canada. This board is based in Iqaluit. 4 Nunavut Impact Review Board. (accessed January 2017). 5 Nunavut Water Board. (accessed January 2017). 6 Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal. (accessed January 2017). 7 (accessed January 2017). 6 BACKGROUND

9 Inuit Organizations The Inuit of Nunavut are part of the land claim s co-management partnership and are represented by Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI). NTI is responsible for ensuring that the promises set out in the NCLA are achieved through coordination and management of Inuit responsibilities and seeing that the federal and territorial governments meet their obligations.8 The Kitikmeot Inuit Association (KIA) is a Designated Inuit Organization (DIO) that represents the Inuit in the Kitikmeot region of Nunavut. They are responsible for protecting and promoting the social, political, environmental and economic well-being of the Inuit population in this region.9 Then there is the Kitikmeot Corporation (KC), an arm of KIA, with the main responsibility of pursuing economic opportunities that strengthen the region and benefit the Inuit of the Kitikmeot region. Both the KIA and KC are based in Cambridge Bay. There have been few examinations of how boards currently function in the Kitikmeot region and whether or not these boards are effective in achieving their mandates. 10 Government of Nunavut: Child Day Care Act (R.S.N.W.T. 1988,c.C-5. pdf (accessed January 2017). Additional links and resources can be found at 11 District Education Authority. (accessed January 2017). BACKGROUND 7

10 Other Boards DAYCARE BOARDS Licensed childcare facilities must meet Government regulations. One of the criteria for the operation of a childcare facility is that it is registered as non-profit society. As such, a board of directors must be in place before such an operation is licensed. Each community in the Kitikmeot region has at least one childcare facility licensed with the Government of Nunavut.10 DISTRICT EDUCATION BOARDS Each education district in Nunavut requires a District Education Authority (DEA) composed of individuals within that district who are interested in education. This group must follow the education regulations set out by the Government of Nunavut. These individuals are elected by the community on three-year terms. They are responsible for making decisions concerning education delivery in the Kindergarten Grade Twelve curriculum and are required to represent the best interest of the community. Some of their responsibilities include: establishing a school calendar, creating by-laws and policies relevant to their communities, overseeing student suspensions and expulsions, and working with the community and school officials in the delivery of the curriculum. Currently the Education Act is under review, which may lead to changes in the powers that these district education authorities have in Nunavut.11 ARCTIC CO-OPERATIVES LIMITED BOARDS Arctic Co-operatives Limited is a business model in which the organization is owned by the members who use the service. Local coops elect board members who are in control over such decisions as hiring management and providing feedback to management on what members want. There are 32 jointly owned and operated Arctic Co-operatives Limited services in Nunavut, NWT and the Yukon. Each community in the Kitikmeot region has an Arctic Co-operatives Limited general store, so in total this region has five ACL stores and five community boards.12 HUNTERS AND TRAPPERS ORGANIZATIONS Each community in the Kitikmeot region has a Hunters and Trappers Organization (HTO). They all work with the Kitikmeot Regional Wildlife Organization (KRWO) to oversee harvesting at local and regional levels including regulating harvesting practices, allocation of basic needs levels for harvesting and overall management of harvesting among the members of HTOs in the region. A number of other boards also operate in the Kitikmeot region.13 A list of all significant boards that came up during research are listed in Appendix Arctic Co-operatives Limited. (accessed January 2017). 13 Hunters and Trappers Organization. (accessed January 2017). 8 BACKGROUND

11 The Kitikmeot Region Nunavut is broken down into three administrative regions: the Kivalliq, the Qikiqtaaluk and the Kitikmeot regions. The Kitikmeot Region is located in western Nunavut and consists of five communities with a collective population of 6,88714 (the total population of Nunavut is 37,280).15 These communities are Kugaaaruk, Taloyoak, Gjoa Haven, Kugluktuk and Cambridge Bay. The Inuit population in this region followed nomadic lifestyles until the late 1960s (accessed January BACKGROUND 9

12 Figure 1 Kitikmeot Population Total Inuit Non-Inuit CAMBRIDGE BAY 1,746 1, KUGLUKTUK 1,610 1, GJOA HAVEN 1,483 1, TALOYOAK 1,076 1, KUGAARUK Figure 2 Qikiqtaaluk Population Figure 3 Kivallik Population 19,654 10,528 21% 10% 79% 90% 10 BACKGROUND

13 RESEARCH I started by creating a database of functioning boards that existed in the Kitikmeot region, beginning with the ones birthed by the NLCA, the IPGs. Then I added to the list by scanning news articles, public forums and public bulletin boards. I also supplemented this approach by engaging in discussion with public members. I then created a questionnaire and made it accessible online and in person. I approached the organizations in my database and asked them to participate in my questionnaire. In return I offered them access to the results of my findings. This resulted in a completion of eight online surveys. In addition to this, I completed nineteen in-person interviews. Although I was able to solicit feedback, I was unsuccessful in engaging all of the boards I approached. Because I did not have a translator with me, I was unable to engage unilingual Inuit as well. RESEARCH 11

14 CONCLUSION Based on the 27 questionnaires completed: 80% of the participants were over the age of % participants expressed interest as motivation for joining a board 75% of member terms were three-year staggered terms, the remaining 25% had terms that were not staggered and ranged from one to four years Some of the shortfalls of my research are: The questionnaire and interviews were conducted in English only I did not get feedback from an elder or youth board member I was unsuccessful in engaging participants from all the boards listed in my database 90% of the participants stated their board did not have youth representatives 75% of the participants stated their board did not have elder representatives 100% of the participants were aware that their role had an effect on the community 45% of participants did not have board training and it affected their ability to carry out their duties 100% of meetings were held monthly and ran from 0 to 4 hours long 100% of the participants stated that quorum was required to pass motions 100% of meetings were open to the public. However, only 25% of the time these were advertised and advertisements were seldom translated into Inuinnaqtun or Inuktitut 12 CONCLUSION

15 Based on the feedback received, the consistency, quality and quantity of board training was identified as a major contributing factor in the effectiveness of board output. Although many of the IPGs follow a board training module with each appointed board member, other boards may not offer the same opportunity to their members. It is important to note that while IPGs have adequate resources, other bodies may lack the time, the people and the funding resources. This presents a unique challenge when it comes to completing action items. Resource people and experts are often required for making informed decisions that adhere to government and organizational regulations and laws. When these resources are not available, important decisions are deferred, causing delays in progress and board inertia. An ineffective Chair was also identified as a barrier to progress made by community boards. Meetings that lacked structure and had little guidelines to how meetings were conducted resulted in long and ineffective discussions. Another obstacle that boards in Nunavut must overcome is the travel that is often required to attend meetings. Meetings are often cancelled due to travel challenges from inclement weather conditions in the communities. These changes can be costly and result in unnecessary changes fees, no-show charges and additional honorarium costs. Oftentimes no backup plans are made for these occurrences and meetings end up being postponed or cancelled altogether. It was mentioned that some of the smaller boards, when not guided by the reporting body, often went months without quorum. There is correlation between these circumstances and boards that have disbanded and/or dissolved. This correlation can be supported by the knowledge that the larger IPGs, where administrative staff from the appointing body communicated regularly with members to keep them engaged and keep dialogue ongoing between members, rarely had issues with disbanding or long intervals between meetings. Nunavummiut, particularly IPG board members, expressed concern that government ministers still had final veto on all decisions. This instilled anxiety and discouraged full engagement in activities due to uncertainty whether the decisions made by these boards would even be enforced and monitored. Internet connectivity was recognized as an issue for some. With slow and costly internet access in the Kitikmeot region, information sharing can be time-consuming and lead to delayed discussions and decisions. Some board members have been asked to use their own internet at home to complete work and the financial burden of this was listed as an issue. CONCLUSION 13

16 RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are based on the feedback provided throughout the research period. These were considered at length based on feasibility and preliminary cost-benefit analysis. Board training should be provided to all new board members, whether they are part of a local, regional or territorial board. This training should aim to teach board members to voice strong concerns and engage in relevant dialogue that would lead to wellthought-out decisions. This training ought to be mandatory and all members of a board should receive the same training to ensure that each member comprehends their role and understands the expectations the appointing body has of them, while giving them the skills to do so effectively. For smaller boards that are tied to essential services and lack funding resources to complete this training, such as daycare boards, I would recommend that the Government of Nunavut step in to address this need. This would be an ongoing and potentially costly endeavour; however, the ramifications of not providing this critical training outweigh the financial costs. The population of Nunavut is young. Public board decisions affect all people in our communities. Therefore, I recommend that all boards adopt a policy to have at least one youth representative seat on their board. This would provide our youth with positive exposure to the decision-making process in these organizations and also give them a voice in the decisions that have the potential to shape the lives of youth. It is impossible to discuss Inuit culture and not address the fact that there is the utmost respect given to our elders. Although their knowledge may not be school-based, they do have transferrable skills and are quite knowledgeable. I recommend that all boards adopt a policy to have at least one elder representative seat on their board. I strongly recommend that if meetings are open to the public, they be advertised well in advance in high-traffic areas of the relevant community and through common media streams. Advertisements must be available in all relevant languages and be clear and concise. Public meetings should have translators available to support the engagement of all members of the public. Again, this can be costly, but the benefits would outweigh the costs. The appointing bodies should engage with their respective board members regularly to maintain interest, keep members updated on any new developments and encourage open dialogue. Additionally, operational procedures should already be in place when board members are appointed. Organizations responsible for selecting board members should adopt policy that allows members to be chosen based on merit and qualifications. This would ensure that decisions are being made by people who understand the depth of the decisions they are making and the implications of those decisions. Board decisions should be final and binding. Any outside organization that relies on these decisions should be briefed and prepared to accept the decisions made by the board. This understanding would enforce the power of these decisions and also limit outside influences and their impact on the decision-making process, and alleviate stress on financial and time resources. 14 RECOMMENDATIONS

17 ACADEMIC STUDIES IN GOVERNANCE University of Saskachewan The Master of Northern Governance and Development at the University of Saskatchewan is the only program in North America that offers students the opportunity to focus on northern governance issues. Applicants may complete the majority of the program online, so it does require a good internet connection. This program includes coursework, an internship and a five-day Northern Saskatchewan field school. The program is designed to be completed over two years and offers scholarships to qualified students to cover tuition costs. Their website strongly encourages northerners to apply. Athabasca University Athabasca University is a Canadian institution that offers online post-secondary courses. One of the courses that they offer is a three-credit governance course in social science and there are no prerequisites. This course focuses on nonprofit and voluntary sector governance with a goal to provide a deeper understanding of the nature of governance, leadership and management. Although there is no specific focus on northern governance, the curriculum is relevant on a Canadian scale. This course would cost approximately $ Carleton University The Centre for Governance and Public Management is a research centre at Carleton University. Their focus lies in public administration, public sector leadership and policy development and implementation in transitional and developing countries. They have recently done work in Botswana, where they helped establish a technical university. They seek opportunities for field research and teaching tools based on international examples, with hopes to engage soon in policy debates on good governance both in and outside of Canada.18 University of Victoria The University of Victoria offers a Master of Arts degree in Indigenous Governance that focuses on current political realities that are relevant to Indigenous communities in Canada. Though you must have an undergraduate degree to pursue the degree, it is one of the more renowned academic institutions in this field of study. This program weaves community engagement into the courses by offering opportunities to devote course work to community initiatives and attempts to prepare students for leadership roles in their communities Athabasca University. (accessed January 2017). 18 Centre for Governance and Public Management. (accessed January 2017). 19 University of Victoria. (accessed January 2017). ACADEMIC STUDIES IN GOVERNANCE 15

18 Banff Centre The Banff Centre offers an Indigenous Leadership program. Realizing that Indigenous nations and organizations are at varying levels of exercising their sovereign rights, the Banff Centre attempts to give students a better understanding of how governance looks and aims to provide a better understanding of colonial forms of governance. Focus on constitutional and legal frameworks is stated as being the basis for successful self-governance and is offered through this institution. The cost of this program is listed at $2, Ryerson University Ryerson University founded the Centre for Indigenous Governance in 2010, with the goal of building capacity in Indigenous governance, encouraging research on governance issues and offering educational opportunities relevant to the Aboriginal population. It offers a variety of workshops, seminars and training programs to address governance concerns and is open to collaborative research on Indigenous issues. 20 Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity. (accessed January 2017). 16 ACADEMIC STUDIES IN GOVERNANCE

19 APPENDIX A : BOARD MEMBERS NUNAVUT WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT BOARD Charlie Inuaraq David Igutsaq Caleb Sangoya Daniel Shewchuk David Kritterdlik Johnny Peters Willie Annanack NUNAVUT PLANNING COMMISSION Andrew Nakashuk Percy Kabloona Ovide Alakanauruk Peter Alareak Charlie Arngak Putulik Papigatuk NUNAVUT IMPACT REVIEW BOARD Elizabeth Copland Henry Ohokannoak Guy Alikut Marjorie Kaviq Kaluraq Philip (Kadlun) Omingmakyok Allen Maghagak 3 Vacancies NUNAVUT SURFACE RIGHTS TRIBUNAL Theodore Bert Rose John Maurice Elisapee Karetak Andre Tautu Meeka Kakudlik NUNAVUT WATER BOARD Thomas Kabloona Lootie Toomasie Ross Mrazek Colin Adjun Alex Ningark Makabee Nortok Norman Mike Amanda Hanson-Main NUNAVUT TUNNGAVIK INCORPORATED Aluki Kotierk James Eetoolook Stanley Anablak Attima Hadlari David Ningeongan Raymond Ningeocheak PJ Akeeagok Olayok Akesuk KITIKMEOT INUIT ASSOCIATION Stanley Anablak Attima Hadlari David Nivingalok Charlie Lyall Andre Otokiak Darlene Elias James Aiyout Simon Komangat Tars Angutingunirk KITIKMEOT CORPORATION Edna Elias Stanley Anablak Bruno Qavvik Wilfred Wilcox Frank Ipakohak APPENDIX A : BOARD MEMBERS 17

20 APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION All decisions made by IPGs follow the same process. The majority vote process is used and decisions that are made must be made with a quorum of members present. All members have a vote, except the Chairperson, who only votes to break a tie. They rely on the Nunavut Government and Inuit partners for advice and technical support but are required to make their decisions on behalf of the public of the Nunavut Settlement Area, not on behalf of their appointing bodies. Each appointed member s term is for a period of three years and a member may be reappointed. Appointing bodies should engage with their respective board members regularly to maintain interest, keep members updated on any new developments and encourage open dialogue. 18 APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION

21 PUBLIC HTO RWO GOVERNMENT Figure 4 NGO NTI The IPG Decision Process Nunavut Land Claim Agreement (Article 5) Wildlife Management Decision Process Management recommendations, consultations, polar bear MOU, public hearings NWMB NGO Non Government Organizations Consideration of proposed management action NTI Nunavut Tungavik Inc. Rejects First decision Final decision HTO Hunter's and Trapper's Organizations GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT RWO Regional Wildlife Organizations GOVERNMENT Accepts or rejects Accepts, rejects or varies Consists of CWS, DFO, and GN CWS Canadian Wildlife Service Challenged Not challenged DFO Department of Fisheries and Oceans JUDICIAL REVIEW GN Government of Nunavut Direction by federal court MOU Memorandum of Understanding MINISTER NWMB Nunavut Wildlife Management Board APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION 19

22 The Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act Establishment of Board 14 (1) There is hereby established the Nunavut Water Board, the members of which are to be appointed by the Minister. Number of members (2) Subject to sections 16 and 17, the Board consists of nine members, including the Chairperson. Proportions (3) The following rules apply to the appointment of members, other than the Chairperson: (a) one half of the members shall be appointed on the nomination of the designated Inuit organization; and (b) one quarter of the members shall be appointed on the nomination of (i) the territorial minister responsible for renewable resources, and (ii) the territorial minister or ministers designated, by an instrument of the Executive Council of Nunavut, for the purposes of this paragraph. Appointment of Chairperson (4) The Chairperson shall be appointed after consultation with the other members. Term of office 15 (1) A member of the Board shall be appointed to hold office for a term of three years. Acting after expiry of term (2) If the term of a member expires before the member has made a decision in a matter for which a public hearing is held, the member may, with the authorization of the Chairperson, continue to act as a member only in relation to that matter until the hearing is concluded and a decision is made. The office of the member is deemed to be vacant as soon as the term expires for the purpose of the appointment of a replacement. Additional members 16 Additional members may be appointed to the Board for the performance of a specified purpose, or for a term of less than three years, in the manner and the proportions provided by subsection 14(3). 20 APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION

23 Inuit of northern Quebec 17 (1) During any period preceding the ratification by the parties of an agreement to settle the offshore land claims of the Inuit of northern Quebec, the Minister shall appoint, on the nomination of Makivik, a number of substitute members of the Board equal to one-half the number appointed on the nomination of the designated Inuit organization. Term (3) Subject to subsection 15(2), the term of a substitute member is three years, except that the term of that member expires on the ratification referred to in subsection (1). Status of substitute members (4) Substitute members shall not be considered to be members, except in respect of decisions referred to in subsection (2). Role of substitute members (2) In respect of licensing decisions of the Board that apply to any area of equal use and occupancy described in Schedule 40-1 to the Agreement, the substitute members shall act in the place of such members appointed on the nomination of the designated Inuit organization as are identified by the Minister, after consultation with that organization, at the time of the appointment of the substitute members. Oath of office 18 Before taking up their duties, members of the Board shall take and subscribe the oath of office set out in Schedule 2 before a person authorized by law to administer oaths. APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION 21

24 Figure 3 Depiction of the Kitikmeot Corporation Performance Review Process KIA BOARD KIA-APPOINTED DIRECTORS (BUSINESS COMPETENCY) KIA-APPOINTED DIRECTORS (CONSTITUENCY) MEMBER OF KIA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE KIA KC BOARD Kitikmeot Inuit Association KC Kitikmeot Corporation Kitikmeot Inuit Association and Kitikmeot Corporation The Kitikmeot Corporation Board meets regularly to review the performance of its investments (subsidiaries, joint ventures, properties and partnerships), establish corporate priorities, approve policies and set KC s strategic direction. All KC Board members are Inuit beneficiaries of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and registered in a Kitikmeot community. The KC Board includes a member of the Kitikmeot Inuit Association Executive Committee and four other members, two of whom are appointed based on their business experience and two appointed based on constituency (representing East and West Kitikmeot). 22 APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION

25 Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated Board of Directors All eight members of the NTI Board of Directors are directly elected by Inuit who are registered under the NLCA. NTI s president and vice-president sit on the NTI Board of Directors along with six RIA representatives, which include the presidents of each RIA. The members of NTI s executive committee include NTI s president and vice-president as well as the presidents of the RIAs. Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated Board of Directors Nunavut Inuit Wildlife Secretariat Article 5 of the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement identifies the responsibilities and authority of designated wildlife organizations, of which the Hunters and Trappers Organizations (HTO) and Regional Wildlife Organizations (RWO) are the main stakeholders. Regional offices were set up to administer funds to the communities and support the regional Boards. However, problems arose because of lack of capacity, lack of external support, mismanagement and other factors. The Wildlife Secretariat was proposed as an alternative means of managing regional budgets and supporting regional Boards and community HTOs. All eight members of the NTI Board of Directors are directly elected by Inuit who are registered under the NLCA. NTI s president and vice-president sit on the NTI Board of Directors along with six RIA representatives, which include the presidents of each RIA. The members of NTI s executive committee include NTI s president and vice-president as well as the presidents of the RIAs. APPENDIX B : BOARD INFORMATION 23

26 APPENDIX C : BOARD REPRESENTATION Nunavut Impact Review Board Nunavut Planning Commission Board Nunavut Water Board Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated Board Kitikmeot Inuit Association Board Kitikmeot Corporation Board Daycare Societies In Each Community District Education Authorities In Each Community Hunters And Trappers Organizations In Each Community Legal Services Board Qulliq Energy Board Community Joint Planning And Management Committee Nunavut Joint Planning And Management Committee Nunavut Resources Corporation Board Nunavut Economic Developers Board Nunavut Business Development Corporation Board Pauktuutit Board Of Directors Nunavut Trust Board Former Kitikmeot Health Board 24 APPENDIX C : BOARD REPRESENTATION

27 Arctic Governance: An Examination of the Effectiveness of Governing Bodies in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut The contents of this publication are entirely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the view or opinions of The Gordon Foundation. This publication is available under limited copyright protection. You may download, distribute, photocopy, cite or excerpt this document provided it is properly and fully credited and not used for commercial purposes. Cover photograph: Aerial view of Cambridge Bay, NU (2017) Angulalik Pedersen 25 25

28 CONTACT The Gordon Foundation 11 Church Street, Suite 400 Toronto, ON M5E 1W1